Y2K and the Legacy of Kanatjan Alibekov

Y2K is all about evaluating risk. We live in a world where the dangers are great and yet most Americans seem to view the world through a soda straw. We view all the bad things as happening 'over there' and 'to someone else'.

Yet,when we are jolted from our sleep and tragically reminded that we are not immune, as was the case in Oklahoma City or Littleton, we stare blankly at each other and rhetorically ask, "How is this possible?" But somewhere, in a dark recess of our hearts we know that not only was it possible, it was inevitable. Look at the bigger picture.

Y2K will not occur in a vacuum. I think that's what keeps the government awake at night. The disruptions that are possible as a direct result of Y2K-related problems are significant. But they really don't compare to the potential indirect consequences.

Case in point: Kanatjan Alibekov

If you've never heard the name before, make it a point to remember it. You'll be living (or not) with the legacy of his work - a thousands like him - long after Y2K is a fading memory.

Mr. Alibekov (now living in the US and using the name Ken Alibek) is a microbiologist and the former deputy chief of Biopreparat, a Russian organization whose task was to research and implement biological weapons for the former Soviet Union. The work apparently continues, sans Alibekov.

The extent of the Soviet biological weapons program became known to our government in the early 90s, after the defection of the first Biopreparat employee Vladimir Pasechnik in 1989 and then by Alibekov in 1992.

Mr Alibekov has written a book about his time with Biopreparat. I hate to recommend it because I'm not thrilled about him profiting from what he has done. Nevertheless, the book details the size and scope of the Soviet bioweapons program. By reading the book, you will gain a very clear insight into why the government is so rattled by the threat of terrorism today.

Read the book. Mr. Alibekov clearly shows that the genie is out of the bottle to stay. Considering his credentials, he should know. Like so much data on the Internet, the information, technology and personnel required to construct weapons capable of enormous damage is already 'out there', available to all. There's no going back and no realistic hope of 'containment' at this point.

You can bet the fact that Y2K may present 'motivated' individuals or organizations with a golden opportunity to initiate an attack with such weapons is not lost on our nation's top security personnel. It may also help to answer why there is highly organized apathy with regard to Y2K preparation from our government. Simply put, those in charge may see the potential for terrorist acts - acts that would make the Oklahoma City bombing look like cakewalk - and they conclude that it is in our national security interests to severely downplay the potential of Y2K and hope for the best. Of course that's just a guess on my part, but if you read Alibekov's book, you won't be able to dismiss the seriousness of the threat.

As I read it, I kept hoping to run across that little paragraph that states "All people and events in this book are ficional...". I never did find it.

Our vulnerability is enormous and our enemies are legion.

All you'd really need for a global, catastrophic event is about 200-300 well trained, well led, well funded, and well organized personnel who are willing to die for their country or for their God. A coordinated dispersal of weaponized Ebola or Marburg or Smallpox (or a combination) in oh, say 30 of the worlds busiest airports would result in a disaster of unimaginable proportions. Even a single, highly motivated, but not especially smart individual could kill thousands.

My family and I are prepared for mild to moderate disruptions in our basic infrastructure due to computer problems that can be fixed (or worked around) in a 'short' amount of time by a cooperating society. These disruptions, if taken in a vacuum, could last a few weeks or months and we'd be OK. Got water. Got heat. Got food. We are not looking forward to disruptions but, if taken in a vacuum, we're about as ready as we'll ever be. We're even ready to help out a small number of close neighbors if need be.

But against weaponized anthrax? smallpox? Rift Valley fever? Marburg?

Sorry, game over.

Our government cannot protect us from this threat. Oh, I believe they'll do what they can. They'll use their intelligence gathering personnel and technology and try to plug the holes in the dike one at a time as they detect them. But they won't find them all. Sooner or later, their going to run out of fingers.

Sooner or later there won't be any U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq.

Thousands of the scientists that the Soviet Union had working on these 'advances' dispersed across the globe when the Soviet Union broke apart 10 years ago. Like pee in a swimming pool, there's no reversing the process.

Albert Einstein, when asked if he was afraid that other countries would learn the 'secret' of producing nuclear weapons said "there is no secret and there is no defense". Einstein would have understood Alibekov.

Answers

Don't let yourselves be rattled by the possibilities of either massive
Y2K breakdowns, nuclear war, or chemical or biological warfare. If it
happens, it happens, and it shouldn't stand in the way of preparations
(or maintaining a fairly upbeat attitude, either). None of us will die
because we got nuked, or got anthrax - we'll die because it was our
time. Being overly concerned about situations and events over
which you have no control is a guaranteed recipe for depression and
ill health. Prepare as best you can, and let someone else make
themselves sick with worry. And remember, even in an all-out NBC
attack, some, perhaps many, will live no matter what.

Arnie----Great post. I predict very few will respond to this "bigger
picture" it is too scarry. Most of us feel or think we can survive a
Y2K senario that would be a 5 to 9 impact. What you write about
people will turn their back on. "Like pee in a swimming pool there's
no reversing the process." Way too scarry for most of us.

Arnie -- clearly you take this multiple biological threat as fact -- I can't argue with that, since I don'tknow enough. But as you paint the picture, we're all tied to the railroad track like Gloria Swanson, the train is coming, and Rin-Tin-Tin the Wonder Dog is not available.

I remember Lyndon a while back saying ""I feel like a hitchhiker caught in a hailstorm on a Texas highway. I can't run, I can't hide, and I can't make it stop." Much like the situation you describe.

Have you any constructive suggestions?

Even if the sky is falling, it does get tiresome to hear the shrill cries of warning repeated so many times. Particularly since nobody knows how to prop it up or glue it back together.

The risks of NBC warfare are one of the main reasons my wife and I
decided to abandon the lower 48, when we relocated for y2k 6 months
ago.

We wanted to stay on U.S. soil, in North America, near or in a small
town with access to the internet, book stores, grocery stores, cable
tv, etc. We also wanted to be in a place that would not get real cold,
and where taking care of shelter, water, heat and food would be
relatively easy. We also did not want our location to be accessible by
road, or on the power grid.

We met all those parameters by moving to the city of Craig on Prince
of Wales Island (America's third largest island), population 2200, in
Southeast Alaska. The first thing you need to know about southeast
Alaska is that it is NOT Anchorage, Fairbanks or the North Pole.
Average temperature in January is 35 F. The weather here is mild year
round with lots of rain, similar to Seattle only rainier. We are
located about 750 miles north of Seattle. You can only get here by
plane or boat. Electricity here is hydro. Timber here is abundant, as
is water and game (dear and black bear). Fishing is first class. In
fact this is a favorite fishing area for many celebrities. No one will
starve up here.

Sometime this fall, we hope to hunker down in a prepared, hidden,
secret location on one of the many uninhabited islands within an hours
boatride from Craig, for a few months and see what happens. But if we
end up staying in Craig, it couldn't be with a nicer, more prepared,
more libertarian bunch of people. We love this place, and whether or
not y2k is a 10 or fizzles, we're happy with our change of lifestyle.

Even if the sky is falling, it does get tiresome to hear the shrill
cries of warning repeated so many times. Particularly
since nobody knows how to prop it up or glue it back together.

I understand what you are saying and therein lies the rub. I have
hundreds of constructive suggestions related to temporary disruptions
in infrastructure caused by computer malfunctions. A great many
problems that might occur are easy to deal with if you've been
diligent in preparing ahead of time. Storing water, food, fuel - those
things are relatively easy for the motivated family to accomplish.

Lest someone think I have changed my position with respect to Y2K and
basic preparations, I have not. I still do not know what will
happen but believe most of us have very little to lose and potentially
much to gain by making some prudent preparations.

My point is that we seem to go about from day to day ignoring very
real dangers and assuming that they pose no real threat to ourselves
and our families.

For example, I was having a discussion about the Yugoslavia situation
last week with a friend and his wife. His wife's position was
essentially "Haven't you seen what is happening to those poor refugees
from Kosovo? Milosevic is such an evil man. He has to be stopped. We
have to send in ground troops and stop him now."

I replied, "I agree that Milosevic is not a very nice man and that he
is causing suffering and death for the people of Kosovo. But you think
the United States should send in ground forces even though it is very
likely that the loss of life will be great?"

"Absolutely" she said.

I then said "So you are ready to sacrifice Jennifer and/or Jason's
life to stop Milosevic?" (Jennifer is her 17 year old daughter. Jason
is her 15 year old son.)

"No, of course not." she said.

"Well then," I replied "Just who's son or daughter are you willing to
sacrifice for this noble cause?"

She didn't say much after that but it was clear that she hadn't
believed that her position to support ground troops would have any
direct effect on her life. She didn't like being reminded that it
could.

It is easy to be brave with other people's lives and other people's
money. It's not so easy when it begins to get personal.

The threat that Y2K poses is, in and of itself, not great if we first
acknowledge it and then move to mitigate it. Choosing not to make
preparations, we needlessly erode the middle ground. We willing choose
to make the problem worse than it needs to be.

The threat posed by biological weapons is qualitatively different
however. We can acknowledge the threat all we like but there is very
little we can personally do to mitigate the threat. There are
few effective vaccines and they are not readily available. New
virus strains are being engineered all the time. What detection
technology that does exist is not widely distributed. Intelligence is
incomplete at best and you simply can't take out a Marburg with a
Mossberg.

Of course I knew that governments around the globe were working on
such weapons. But I was surprised by the sheer size and scope of the
Biopreparat programs. And what concerns me most is that, with the
breakup of the former Soviet Union, a great many of the personnel once
employed by the Soviets are now spread out across the globe - in Iraq,
in North Korea, in Cuba, and other places where they can find
employment.

There is no better time to attack your enemy than when he is down. To
the extent that Y2K offers such an opportunity to those people who are
insane enough to actually use such weapons, I am deeply concerned. Do
I have any direct evidence that an bioweapons attack is imminent? Of
course not. But there is plenty of reason to believe that we will be
the targets of such an attack at some point in our future.

I suspect that if Y2K results in significant problems around the globe
(even if big problems do not material here in the U.S.), a great many
who are capable will seize the opportunity to settle old scores and
redraw the borders.

Bioweapons are not especially difficult or expensive to produce and
deliver. At least with nuclear weapons, there was some hope of
containment.

I would like to tell you that the sky is not falling. I would like to
tell you that our governement has this bioweapons threat clearly under
control. I would like to tell you that these weapons pose no bigger
threat than Y2K itself and that there is a great deal you can do to
protect yourself and your family from this threat. I would like to
believe that Y2K were occurring in a vacuum and that it was the only
threat we have to deal with.

But is the only response to the bioweapons threat simply to say to
ourselves that "This problem is so big we must ignore it."? I don't
think so but I'm at a loss to tell you how to put the genie back in
the bottle. How do you fight to protect yourself against such
unparalleled lunacy?

Your (U.S.) government has put all of you at tremendous risk. Its
insane foreign policy has put the U.S. to position number 1 of most of
the hit lists of the world.

Unfortunately, those abroad with the hit lists are just as screwed up
as the shooters in Colorado, and the myriad others who have dropped
out of the medias' sight.

If the terrorists and shooters had any sense, they would be targeting
the "leaders" rather than the peons. It only makes sense to target
the peons when they are in an important support position to the
leaders.

Targeting the peons just because they are easier to get to, just
creates the peons' (sheeple) crying to their leadership to "do
something" more, which just increases the power of the leadership.
(This for example, makes the scenario of the OKC bombing as government
sponsored a reasonable one. BTW, why did the gov't raze the site so
quickly after -- afraid someone might find anomolous evidence?) This
makes the shooter/terrorist target even "harder."

Terrorism against a population does nothing to dissuade the
"leadership". Targeting leadership and its support staff does do so.

Why, for example, is Klinton bombing all the civilians in Yugo? If he
really has such a beef with Milo, why hasn't he gone directly after
him? Ditto Sadaam in Iraq?

Why hasn't Saadam gone directly after Klinton (or Bush)? Their
whereabouts are pretty much public knowledge.

Answer: All the political leaders today, as opposed to the conquerors
of old, are chicken shit. It must be a rule of statecraft today that
you can bomb,kill,gas... the hell out of the civilians, but the
leaderships are off limits. A far cry from the olden days where the
chiefs, generals, even kings were in the middle of the battle, not
sitting in a bunker 1000 feet undergound and/or out of range of the
enemy.

Years ago, I used to see in newspapers legal announcements re: "I
John Doe, am no longer responsible for the debts ... of ...." Divorce
related. Maybe they still have them, maybe not with "no fault."

Anyway, maybe we shoudl start publishing to the world that "I, John
Doe, am not responsible for the actions of the U.S. government, the
government of the State of .... the county of, the city of...." Of
course, if you participate in the voting charade, you cannot make such
a claim.

The only way to get rid of tyrants is to make tyranny unprofitable.
The ultimate unprofitability is the loss of life.

A said:
"Targeting the peons just because they are easier to get to, just
creates the peons' (sheeple) crying to their leadership to "do
something" more, which just increases the power of the leadership.

That, apparently, is exactly what the leadership here in the U.S.
wants to happen. And, if there aren't enough real bogeymen out there
to do the job of making the sheeple bleat away their rights, they'll
invent some.

"(This for example, makes the scenario of the OKC bombing as
government sponsored a reasonable one. BTW, why did the gov't raze the
site so quickly after -- afraid someone might find anomolous
evidence?)"

Right again. It's called destruction of evidence and/or tampering with
a crime scene - the same thing occurred immediately after Waco. What
keeps me up at nights and sometimes makes me cry is that almost none
of my fellow countrymen thought that it was anything out of the
ordinary. If America falls, it will because its inhabitants are too
lazy and stupid to deserve what cost their forefathers so much blood.

P.S. I take it your not an American, A... congratulations on being
able to see what so few here find invisible.

klm: Unfortunately I am domiciled in Amerika. I do try to remember
to say "your government" or better, the "U.S. government" in my posts.
(While most readers are probably in U.S., many are not.) It sure as
hell is not "my" government. I support it in no way except by TDC
(threat, duress, coercion).